|
 |
|
 |
|
Cheney The foulist form nazified thinking
|
|
On Fri, 22 May 2009 10:57:33 -0400, "Geno4321" <...@fuse.net
Countdown: Special Comment on Dick Cheney's Speech--In the Name of God, Go!
By Heather
From Countdown, Keith's Special Comment after watching Dick Cheney's speech
today. Keith takes former Vice President Cheney to task for defending the
use of torture while refusing to accept any responsibility for his actions.
Finally tonight, as promised, a Special Comment about Mr. Cheney's speech.
Neurotic...
Paranoid...
False to fact and false to reason...
Forever self-rationalizing...
His inner rage at his own impotence and failure dripping from every
word...
And as irrational, as separated from the real world, as dishonest, as
insane, as any terrorist...
The former Vice President has today humiliated himself beyond redemption.
The delusional claims he has made this day could be proved by
documentation and first-hand testimony to be the literal truth, and still he
himself would be wrong, because the America he sought to impose upon the
world and upon its own citizens, the dark hateful place of Dick Cheney's own
soul, the place he to this hour defends and to this day prefers, is a
repudiation of all that our ancestors, all that for which our brave troops
of 200 years ago and two minutes ago, have sacrificed and fought.
I do have to congratulate you, Sir. No man living or dead could have
passed the buck more often than you did in 35 minutes this morning.
It's not your fault we water-boarded people, you said.
It isn't torture, you said, even though it is based on 111 years of
American military prosecutions.
It was in the Constitution that you could do it, even if our laws told
you, you could not.It was in the language of the 2001 military authorization
you force-fed the Congress that you could do it, even if our international
treaties told you, you could not.
It produced invaluable information, you said, even though the first-hand
witnesses, the interrogators of these beasts, said the information preceded
the torture and ended when it began.
It was authorized, you said, by careful legal opinion, even though the
legal opinions were dictated by you and your cronies, and, oh by the way,
the torture began before the legal opinions were even written.
It was authorized, you said, and you imply even if it really wasn't, it
was done to "only detainees of the highest intelligence value."
It was more necessary, you said, because of the revelation of another
program by the real villains, the New York Times, even though that
revelation was possible because the program was detailed on the front page
of the website of a defense department sub-contractor.
It was all the fault of your predecessors, you said, who tried to treat
terror as a "law enforcement problem," before you came to office and rode to
the rescue... after you totally ignored terrorism for the first 20 percent
of your first term and the worst attack on this nation in its history
unfolded on **your** watch."
9/11 caused everyone to take a **serious second look at threats that had
been gathering for awhile," you said today, "and enemies whose plans were
getting bolder and more sophisticated."
Gee, thanks for being motivated, by the deaths of nearly 3,000
Americans, to go so far as to "take a serious second look." And thank you,
Sir, for admitting, obviously inadvertently, that you did not take a serious
**first** look in the seven months and 23 days between your inauguration and
9/11.
For that attack, Sir, you are culpable, morally, ethically. At best you
were guilty of malfeasance and eternally-lasting stupidity. At worst, Sir,
in the deaths of 9/11, you are negligent.
The circular logic, and the self-righteous sophistry, falls from a copy
of Mr. Cheney's speech like bugs from a book on a moldy shelf. He still
believes in "dictators like Saddam Hussein with known ties to Mideast
terrorists." He still assumes everyone we captured is guilty without charge
or trial, but that to prosecute law-breaking by government officials is "to
have an incoming administration criminalize the policy decisions of its
predecessors."
And most sleazy of all, while calling the CIA torturers "honorable," he
insists the grunts at Abu Ghraib were "a few sadistic prison guards (who)
abused inmates in violation of American law, military regulations, and
simple decency" even though -- and maybe he doesn't know we know this --
even though there is documentary proof that those guards were acting on
orders originating in the office of Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld.
It is, in short, madness. Madness, Sir. Mr. Cheney, your speech was
almost entirely about you...There are only five or six other people even
mentioned, and only two quoted at any length.And why would you have quoted,
as you did, the man who said this" I know that this program saved lives. I
know we've disrupted plots. I know this program alone is worth more than the
FBI, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the National Security Agency put
together have been able to tell us."
As you know, Sir, you are quoting former CIA Director George Tenet.That
would be the George Tenet who told Congress, on February 11th, 2003,
quote:"Iraq is harboring senior members of a terrorist network led by Abu
Musab al-Zarqawi, a close associate of al Qaeda."
Mr. Tenet then went into elaborate detail about the Iraq/Al-Qaeda
connection.None of it was true.This is your source.As he was your boss's
source."
George, how confident are you?" President Bush asked Tenet about Saddam
Hussein's Weapons of Mass Destruction, just before the Iraq war, according
to Bob Woodward's book "Plan Of Attack."
"Don't worry," Tenet answered. "It's a slam-dunk."That is your
independent authority on how well torture worked.Next time you see him, Mr.
Cheney, you might as well ask Mr. Tenet if he thinks he is Napoleon.
I don't want to know who you think you are:"...those are the basic facts
on enhanced interrogations," you concluded. "And to call this a program of
torture is to libel the dedicated professionals who saved American lives,
and to cast terrorists and murderers as innocent victims."
You saved no one, Sir.
If the classified documents you seek released really did detail plots
other than those manufactured by drowning men in order to get it to stop, or
if they truly did note plans beyond the laughable ones you and President
Bush already revealed -- hijackers without passports targeting a building
whose name Mr. Bush couldn't remember, clowns who thought they could destroy
airports by dropping matches in fuel pipelines 30 miles away, men who
planned to attack a military base dressed as Pizza delivery boys forgetting
that every man there was armed, and today: the four would-be Synagogue
bombers, one of whom turns out to keep bottles of urine in his apartment,
and to be on schizophrenia medicine--
If those documents contained anything of value... you would have leaked
them already! As you leaked those revenge fantasies of the Library Tower and
the J-F-K Bomber, and the Fort Dix Six. "When they (terrorists) see the
American government caught up in arguments about interrogations, or whether
foreign terrorists have constitutional rights, they don't stand back in awe
of our legal system and wonder whether they had misjudged us all along."
Instead the terrorists see just what they were hoping for - our unity
gone, our resolve shaken, our leaders distracted. In short, they see
weakness and opportunity."
The weakness the terrorists see, Sir, is the weakness of blind rage
replacing essential cold logic.
The weakness the terrorists see, Sir, is the weakness of judgment
suspended, in favor of self-fulfilling prophecy.The weakness the terrorists
see, Sir, is the weakness of moral force supplanted by violence and revenge
fantasies.The weakness the terrorists see, Sir, is the weakness... of Dick
Cheney.
And yet, still, ceaselessly, indefatigably, you moralize and lie to us.
"I might add," someone said today, "that people who consistently distort the
truth in this way are in no position to lecture anyone about 'values.'"
Very apt.The quote is from your speech...Your speech, which was at
essence, about your fantasy that you and Mr. Bush were not negligent...
About your pig-headed certainty first that these attacks were
impossible, then that they were a good excuse for a war you had already
planned in Iraq, and finally that they were to be imminently repeated and
only you knew whence the next threat would next come.
You saved no one, Mr. Cheney.
All you did... was help kill Americans.
You were negligent before 9/11.
Your response to your complicity by omission on 9/11, was panic, and
shame, and insanity, and lying this country into a war that did nothing but
kill 4,299 more of us.We will take no further instruction from you, Sir.
Let me again quote Oliver Cromwell to you, Mr. Cheney:
You have sat too long for any good you have been doing lately... Depart,
I say; and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go!
Video: http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/media/play/wmv/8372/28331
KO was as usual great, and I know he or his staff or both read here at c
and elle so I need to point something out;
Cheney is not delusional, he's lying, two different things
Cheney knows with no doubt there was far more actionable intelligence
obtained without torture then with
he knows he created more terrorists by his policies
he knows far more Americans died after 9/11 from terrorism then before
and he knows it's his policies that created those results
he knows torture creates more problems then it ever solves
he knows and ordered torture to gather confessions that were not true
Cheney is not delusional, he is a studied graduate from the strauss
school of sociopathy and politics, as is krystol and the entire pnac, the
students leave telling what they "call" "noble lies" to achieve their goal
Cheney is a sociopath and a liar, not delusional
I hope ko can do his next piece on cheney with that fact in mind
make certain you read that link, it describes why and how all the lies
and what to expect, one of the best links you'll likely read concerning the
neo con strategy
Cheney the murderer is a liar and coward running scared shitting at
everyone just to avoid prison.
At least George Bush has the sense to STFU.
|
| |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
On Fri, 22 May 2009 08:19:40 -0700 (PDT), kntnkrsolfrt <...@gmail.com
Wish you did.
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sat, 23 May 2009 11:39:25 -0400, "Geno4321" <...@fuse.net
Do you know Bush never uttered one word duing his 8 years in office.
Everything said was pipped ino Bush's mouth by Cheney.
Isn't it interestinhg that Bush hasn't made one comment now he is out of
office.
But Cheney's mouth is still going full speed ahead.
"kntnkrsolfrt" <...@x31g2000prc.googlegroups.com...
Wish you did.
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
Anonymous Wrote:
I listened to the entirety of Cheney's speech. The poor old sot is
divorced from reality.
Ylem
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Fri, 22 May 2009 14:49:42 -0700 (PDT), kntnkrsolfrt <...@gmail.com
You have more respect for Cheney than I have for BO. I have NEVER
listened to an entire speech of the... the... black chicago
neighborhood co-ordinator.
Cheney *IS* reality.
You are a lunatic.
Chalie
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sat, 23 May 2009 12:07:38 -0400, "Geno4321" <...@fuse.net
"kntnkrsolfrt" <...@p6g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
You have more respect for Cheney than I have for BO. I have NEVER
listened to an entire speech of the... the... black chicago
neighborhood co-ordinator.
Cheney *IS* reality.
So was Hitler. Ask any Jew.
You are a lunatic.
Chalie
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Fri, 22 May 2009 21:54:04 GMT, **Dalin** <...@mindspring.com
On Fri, 22 May 2009 14:49:42 -0700 (PDT), kntnkrsolfrt
<...@gmail.com
I think the give and take between the two is good for the nation - for
those who bother to listen to both, of course.
Dalin
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Fri, 22 May 2009 20:25:49 -0500, "normak" <...@qREMOVETHIS.com
"**Dalin**" <...@news.east.earthlink.net...
That wasn't how it started though. Cheney had booked his speech a long time
ago, but the President decided to use the time just before he gave it for
some reason. So it was really unintntional., although it looked to be
together.
NormaK
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Fri, 22 May 2009 21:20:09 -0700 (PDT), Bob G <...@gmail.com
Charlie, I, and Dick Cheney, along with several others on this group,
share a common trait. Our minds are made up and we do not want be
confused with facts.
Bob G
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Fri, 22 May 2009 21:43:36 -0700 (PDT), kntnkrsolfrt <...@gmail.com
On May 22, 9:20 pm, Bob G <...@gmail.com
There is little I can do about his tactics. I will not listen to his
bullshit.
Charlie
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sat, 23 May 2009 12:11:31 -0400, "Geno4321" <...@fuse.net
"normak" <...@giganews.com...
Just what does Bush say. I have not heard him making any comment to date.
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Fri, 22 May 2009 16:02:59 -0700 (PDT), kntnkrsolfrt <...@gmail.com
On May 22, 2:54 pm, **Dalin** <...@mindspring.com
I'll say that a different way but understand what you are saying and
respect your opinion. I am glad VP Cheney is speaking out. He and the
president he served under are coming and have come under attack for 8
years. BO should have to answer for the things he is doing and Cheney
seems willing to rebut it.
George W. Bush indicated after the election that he felt BO should
have a chance to show what he can do and, for now, he is keeping
silent. Good for him.
I will not listen to BO speech's. I became convinced during the long
campaign that he promised everything that he feels any voter might
want with no experience to know if it is possible. He quite simply, to
me, is a *liar*. He apologizes around the world for things that I do
not feel the US was wrong in doing.
Why would I listen to him if I don't trust anything he says?
Charlie
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Fri, 22 May 2009 23:15:05 GMT, **Dalin** <...@mindspring.com
On Fri, 22 May 2009 16:02:59 -0700 (PDT), kntnkrsolfrt
<...@gmail.com
Because you can't fault him for what he says if you don't listen to
him.
Dalin
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sun, 24 May 2009 13:49:23 -0400, "Joan F \(MI\)" <...@removethisameritech.net
He'll let Rush Limbaugh interpret for him.
|
| Because you can't fault him for what he says if you don't listen to
| him.
|
| Dalin
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Fri, 22 May 2009 16:35:32 -0700 (PDT), kntnkrsolfrt <...@gmail.com
On May 22, 4:15 pm, **Dalin** <...@mindspring.com
We do, I think all of us, comment on what politicians say from news
accounts. I just don't care to use what time I have left here with
Obama speeches, which I don't trust.
What the news carries if not accurate will be contested or accepted
and I just chose to learn anything about him indirectly.
You may have noticed I have no respect for our president.
Charlie
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sat, 23 May 2009 00:03:54 GMT, **Dalin** <...@mindspring.com
On Fri, 22 May 2009 16:35:32 -0700 (PDT), kntnkrsolfrt
<...@gmail.com
I don't have much either, but do like to listen to what he says. I
would rather judge for myself than listen to biased reporters or
biased ng people. And tell me who reports the news straight now.
Dalin
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Fri, 22 May 2009 17:13:27 -0700 (PDT), kntnkrsolfrt <...@gmail.com
On May 22, 5:03 pm, **Dalin** <...@mindspring.com
Oh, and Charles Krauthammer, Washingtom Post.
Charlie
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On 23 May 2009 00:05:17 GMT, "Sim mac Liam" <...@comcast.nospam.net
**Dalin** <...@news.east.earthlink.net:
I do.
--
Saint Sim mac Liam
Carriagemaker to the court of Queen Maeve
Prophet of The Great Tagger
Canonized December '99
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sat, 23 May 2009 12:09:26 -0400, "Geno4321" <...@fuse.net
"Sim mac Liam" <...@74.209.136.100...
Check out the new kid on the block.
LinkTV.org
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On 23 May 2009 18:02:17 GMT, "Sim mac Liam" <...@comcast.nospam.net
"Geno4321" <...@FUSE.NET:
Funded by:
http://www.linktv.org/whoweare/funders
--
Saint Sim mac Liam
Carriagemaker to the court of Queen Maeve
Prophet of The Great Tagger
Canonized December '99
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sat, 23 May 2009 17:36:48 -0400, "Geno4321" <...@fuse.net
It's much more interesting than the 6 major news medias that appers on
Cable and Satelite At least there is no Government funding as in the other
stations.
One only has to think of PBC when it got its claws into PBC.
____________________________________________
The Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) is probably the closest entity America
has to a government-funded television network. For decades, PBS has
maintained its mission of providing high quality (and non-partisan) news,
documentary, alternative and childrens programming. Its job has been made
even harder in recent years, due to fights over programme content, federal
funding battles and critics who question whether PBS is needed in a world of
cable and other alternative video outlets. But PBS has not thrown in the
towel. It developed non-commercial childrens programming with an
educational slant long before such cable networks as Nickelodeon and Disney.
PBS shows such as The French Chef paved the way for Food Network, while the
long-running This Old House proved to be the foundation for Home & Garden
Television (not to mention such home renovation shows as Trading Spaces and
Extreme Makeover: Home Edition. PBS has also increased its commitment to
news and public affairs (including documentaries) at a time when the major
commercial broadcasters have reduced news content; PBS shows such as
Frontline and The NewsHour With Jim Lehrer deliver analysis and information
without partisan favour or flack.
To be clear, PBS is NOT an arm of the federal government; although Congress
does allocate federal dollars for the network. PBS is funded mainly through
grants from private and commercial organizations, and contributions to local
PBS affiliated stations by their audiencespeople the network calls viewers
like you. (Most public television stations in the States hold annual or
semi-annual telethons or pledge drives to raise money.)
When television broadcasting began on a major scale in the U.S. after World
War Two, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) allocated no less than
242 channels for what was then known as educational television. Some of
those stations were run by universities and colleges, which funded the
broadcasts. Others were stations that competed with commercial channels in
their areas. But the FCC failed to resolve the issue of funding
non-commercial television; for the most part, the educational broadcasts
were poorly produced and had little visual or creative appeal. Instead, the
camera was focused on the instructor as he or she displayed the subject at
hand. It was a cheap and bare-bones format, but simply not competitive with
sponsored (and more entertaining) broadcast programmes on the commercial
networks.
In 1952, the non-profit Ford Foundation began donating funds to educational
television, which led to the creation of the National Educational Television
Center (NET), a clearinghouse for the nations educational stations.
NET-member stations would produce their own shows and films would be mailed
to other NET outlets for viewing. The cost of live broadcasting ruled out a
true network of stations that could show the same programmes at the same
time coast-to-coast. And the continued mediocre quality of the shows that
did air were watched by a fraction of those tuned into commercial stations.
In 1958, John White, who headed WQED-TV in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, became
the new president of NET. White knew if educational television were to
succeed, it had to provide higher quality and more entertaining shows, with
the same national reach as the commercial networks. Naturally, that required
more money. Whats more, educational television was not broadcasting in the
nations largest city, New York, where lawmakers and opinion makers could
see the potential of educational TV. To help the process along, White moved
NETs headquarters to New York City, while supporters laid the groundwork to
build or obtain a station dedicated to educational television in the Big
Apple.
Their chance came in 1961, when National Telefilm Associates decided to sell
its money-losing WNTA-TV, a commercial station in neighbouring New Jersey
that could be seen in New York City, and broadcast on the far more popular
VHF band (Channel 13) to boot. A group known as Educational Television for
the Metropolitan Area worked to purchase WNTA and turn it into a
non-commercial station. After much manoeuvring and in-fighting, the FCC
approved the purchase of WNTA to ETMA for just over six million dollars.
(Part of the money to buy WNTA came from ABC, CBS and NBC, who saw the
benefits of having one less commercial competitor in the New York City
area..) The station was renamed WNDT (short for New Dimensions in
Television; the call letters were later changed to WNET). The new station
made its debut in September 1962, but its launch was not auspicious. Not
only did local unions strike against the station over the use of teachers on
the air, but WNDT aired a British film critical of the American television
networks, upsetting broadcast executives who helped fund the new station.
Soon after, the station went dark for nearly two weeks before WNDT settled
its union problems and returned to the airwaves.
The impact was not immediate, but with educational TV now up and running in
New York, it had more visibilityand more donated fundingthan ever before.
Educational TV nationally was also helped by the passage of the 1962
All-Channel Bill, which required new television sets sold in the USA to pick
up both UHF (channels 2-13) and VHF stations (channels 14-83). More UHF
stations went online, bringing educational television to cities that didnt
have it. It also spurred the growth of independent commercial stations
(those not affiliated with a network). Whats more, the All-Channel Bill
helped the third-ranked ABC network to thrive. By 1970, ABC would finally
have affiliates in every major U.S. city, ending its lack of national
coverage versus CBS and NBC.
NET moved forward by presenting new programmes from its various member
stations to a national audience, including the long-running childrens
programme Mister Rogers Neighborhood and author Julia Child, whose
light-hearted cooking programme The French Chef became one of NETs first
hits after airing on Bostons local station WGBH. NET also increased its
content of programmes obtained from the BBC; it also began airing
hard-hitting documentary shows such as NET Journal. That programme was
criticized by some NET-affiliated stations in the South for what they saw as
liberal content.
The increase in NET-produced programming and the industry switch from black
and white to colour broadcasting also meant more money was needed. But in
1966, the Ford Foundation began withdrawing some of its financial support,
leaving NET without a steady source of money. That changed a year later when
President Lyndon Johnson signed the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967. It
created a private, non-profit corporation known as the Corporation for
Public Broadcasting, and enabled Congress to allocate a certain amount of
money for what was now known as public television. Initially, CPB worked
with the existing NET, but in 1969, a new television network was formedthe
Public Broadcasting Service (PBS); a year later, NET merged with New Yorks
public TV station WNET; by 1970, PBS became the public face of Americas
non-commercial network.
PBS does not produce its own programmes; instead, it purchases shows from
its member stations, independent producers and overseas providers. One of
PBS first major successes came in 1969, with the premiere of Sesame Street.
A breakthrough in childrens educational programming, Sesame Street used the
techniques of commercial television (including fast-moving advertisements)
to teach kids the alphabet and numbers. It proved to be a big draw with both
preschoolers and grateful parents. Other notable PBS childrens shows
included ZOOM, The Electric Company, Mister Rogers, Arthur, Barney &
Friends, Reading Rainbow and 3-2-1 Contact.
In prime time, PBS has offered audiences a mixture of specials and regular
series including Masterpiece Theater (made up largely of British offerings);
Great Performances; Live From The Met; American Playhouse; Nova; Antiques
Roadshow; American Experience and P.O.V. Also a part of PBS history since
1990 is the work of in-house documentary producer Ken Burns. His
well-produced programmes for the network have included The Civil War, which
was one of most successful shows in PBS history. Other Burns documentaries
have included Baseball, Brooklyn Bridge, Empires Of The Air and Biographies
In Jazz.
PBS also proved to be ahead of the curve when it came to an emerging type of
television genre. In 1973, PBS aired An American Family, a 12-part
documentary that showed the day-to-day activities of the Loud clan from
Santa Barbara, California. It proved revolutionary in the fact that a
nuclear family was documented day and night (about 300 hours of film were
shot). An American Family also proved to be realin ways viewers did not
expect. During the shows run, oldest son Lance Loud came out to his parents
as a homosexual (a breakthrough for television); whats more, parents Bill
and Pat Loud had been having marital problems. They came to a climax when
Pat asked for a divorce and demanded that Bill leave the familys homea
private tragedy played out before the cameras. It was rivetingand over ten
million viewers tuned into PBS to watch An American Family, now considered
the grandfather of todays reality programme wave.
Because one-sixth of PBS funding comes from the federal government (most
comes from viewer contributions and state governments through university
funding), there have been battles with lawmakers over the years. During the
Nixon administration, there were efforts to turn PBS into a mouthpiece for
the federal government. A group of powerful PBS stations succeeded in
fighting the administration, throwing out Nixon appointees and airing the
Watergate hearings in Congress during 1973 and 1974, which led to Nixons
resignation. Ronald Reagans administration tried to cut federal funding for
PBS, but Democrats in Congress managed to fight most of Reagans efforts.
The 1994 takeover of Congress by Republicans gave that partys leaders
another chance to cut funding for PBS (some GOP members claimed the network
was elitist and liberal, even though there were programmes featuring a
conservative point of view). The Clinton administration managed to keep much
of PBS funding, but the network was again fighting for its financial life
when George W. Bush came into office. Its likely public broadcasting will
continue to be a political football until a more stable (and apolitical)
funding system is agreed upon.
Some people have also criticized PBS for its use of overseas programming,
especially shows from the UK (one joke is that PBS stands for Primarily
British Shows). But PBS stations have broadcast the UKs best costume dramas
and miniseries, individual stations also gave Americans their first look at
such British series hits as Monty Pythons Flying Circus, Are You Being
Served?, Keeping Up Appearances and Fawlty Towers.
Its estimated that public broadcasting draws between two and three million
viewers a week (far below that of most of the major broadcast networks in
the US, and even below some of the most popular cable outlets). But for all
its faults, Americans seem to respect public television (according to annual
surveys conducted for PBS). Proof of that came in February 2008, when
Charles McGrath wrote a scathing article for The New York Times about PBS
and its programming philosophy:
Scanning the PBS line-up, in fact, its hard to detect much of a
(conservative or liberal) bias toward anything at all, except possibly
mustiness. Except for Antiques Roadshow, all the prime-time stalwartsThe
NewsHour, Nova, Nature, Masterpiece Theaterare into their third or fourth
decade, and they look it....Forty years ago it really was different. There
were only three networks, and none of them were known for challenging or
high-minded programming. Indeed, public broadcasting came into being out of
collective despair over what had become of the airwaves. Cable has changed
all that. There are not only countless more channels to chose from now, but
many offer the kind of stuff that in the past you could see only on public
TV, and in at least some instances they do it better.
The Times received over 800 responses to McGraths piece, most supporting
PBS. One regular public television viewer had this to say: PBS is a gift
from the American people to the American people. It costs relatively little
and provides much of value. Why would we want to discontinue this gift that
goes on giving?
Sooner or later, PBS will have to present new programmes tuned to its
audiences. But as long as there is viewer and funding support, Americas
public television system will likely remain a part of the broadcast
landscape for some time to come
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --
"Sim mac Liam" <...@74.209.136.90...
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On 24 May 2009 16:15:29 GMT, "Sim mac Liam" <...@comcast.nospam.net
"Geno4321" <...@FUSE.NET:
While organizations like the Tides Foundation and it's contributors are
entitled to fund the voicing of their opinions, let's not pretend that
their opinions are based in a paradigm even remotely like the one held by
the founders of this country or the ideological descendants of those
founders.
http://www.activistcash.com/organization_overview.cfm/oid/225
Additionally, PBS gets most of the funding which influences it's content
from a list of contributors very similar to those who fund your new
heroes and that comprise the list of donors to the Tides foundation.
--
Saint Sim mac Liam
Carriagemaker to the court of Queen Maeve
Prophet of The Great Tagger
Canonized December '99
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Fri, 22 May 2009 17:12:23 -0700 (PDT), kntnkrsolfrt <...@gmail.com
On May 22, 5:03 pm, **Dalin** <...@mindspring.com
I still trust the Wall Street Journal and Bret Baer show on Fox.
I don't like this president but am sure I'll not be a dis-respectful
of him as most were about our last president.
Glad you are on the *centrer right" side of things here, Dalin. We
need voices.
Charlie
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sat, 23 May 2009 21:04:43 GMT, **Dalin** <...@mindspring.com
On Fri, 22 May 2009 17:12:23 -0700 (PDT), kntnkrsolfrt
<...@gmail.com
There ain't nobody gonna listen Charlie. The Dems think Obama is God.
When the factories move overseas, when there are no jobs, when there
is no religion, when your 401k is empty, when you wait four months for
elective surgery and have to go to a hospital 100 miles from home,
they will still think Obama is God.
Dalin
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sat, 23 May 2009 14:48:46 -0700, "Joy" <...@real-me.net
"**Dalin**" <...@news.east.earthlink.net...
You've really bought into JD's anti-Democrat garbage, haven't you? "The
Dems" are individuals, with varying opinions. Are the Republicans, or do
you all think alike?
Joy
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sat, 23 May 2009 23:30:32 GMT, **Dalin** <...@mindspring.com
On Sat, 23 May 2009 14:48:46 -0700, "Joy" <...@real-me.net
Have you ever listened to Ylem? <gyou individuals?
Dalin
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sat, 23 May 2009 14:21:15 -0700 (PDT), kntnkrsolfrt <...@gmail.com
On May 23, 2:04 pm, **Dalin** <...@mindspring.com
I'm selfish. <g
I do and say what is right for *me*. I don't expect to convince any.
Hopefully on occassion a point can be made that causes someone to
think differently and maybe they will tone down their dislike of
America and conservatives. But I suspect not.
Charlie
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sun, 24 May 2009 13:55:00 -0400, "Joan F \(MI\)" <...@removethisameritech.net
We don't dislike conservatives but those in charge of the Republican party
these days are not true conservatives. They are warmongers who have
destroyed the party, I don't know why you would be happy about that.
|
| I'm selfish. <g|
| I do and say what is right for *me*. I don't expect to convince any.
|
| Hopefully on occassion a point can be made that causes someone to
| think differently and maybe they will tone down their dislike of
| America and conservatives. But I suspect not.
|
| Charlie
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sat, 23 May 2009 17:24:31 -0400, "Marsha" <...@bellsouth.net
Factories moved in other countries way before Obama came in, be fair.
401K's were losing before him and we have no health program as of yet if
ever.
"**Dalin**" <...@news.east.earthlink.net...
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sat, 23 May 2009 23:27:12 GMT, **Dalin** <...@mindspring.com
Sure they were but we thought Obama was going to change all that and
not by taking them over and having them run by the government. That
is just a step towards socialism. I think you have to let companies
dig their own way out of their messes and the strongest will survive.
And won't be run by the government.
Dalin
On Sat, 23 May 2009 17:24:31 -0400, "Marsha" <...@bellsouth.netwrote:
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sun, 24 May 2009 13:58:12 -0400, "Joan F \(MI\)" <...@removethisameritech.net
They aren't going to be run by the government, they are being forced by the
government to reorganize. Not by legislation but by the force that any
creditor would have--do it the way we want it done or we won't lend you the
money. There is no other lender willing or able to provide this funding.
It's more accurately a creditor mandate than a government mandate.
| Sure they were but we thought Obama was going to change all that and
| not by taking them over and having them run by the government. That
| is just a step towards socialism. I think you have to let companies
| dig their own way out of their messes and the strongest will survive.
| And won't be run by the government.
|
| Dalin
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sun, 24 May 2009 23:54:38 GMT, **Dalin** <...@mindspring.com
But doesn't the government own a large percentage of stock in GM now?
A controlling percentage?
On Sun, 24 May 2009 13:58:12 -0400, "Joan F \(MI\)"
<...@removethisameritech.net
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sun, 24 May 2009 21:47:02 -0400, "Joan F \(MI\)" <...@removethisameritech.net
They will when the reorganization is complete whether in or out of
bankruptcy. Stockholders don't run the company, they have the right to vote
for the directors though normal shareholders don't usually pay much
attention to those elections.
| But doesn't the government own a large percentage of stock in GM now?
| A controlling percentage?
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sat, 23 May 2009 19:35:09 -0400, "Marsha" <...@bellsouth.net
They got money from the first stimulus also. Maybe taking then over will get
the ball running to get it done right, we won't have them forever. I just
don't understand what you want someone to do in 6 months.
You once said all Obama does is talk doom and gloom, I see you with a cup
half full. I agree things look bad but gee give every one a chance to get
things done and done right. It's not just us, it's a world thing right now,
everyone is trying to come up with some kind of plan but it takes time and
it takes money
"**Dalin**" <...@news.east.earthlink.net...
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sun, 24 May 2009 14:12:45 -0400, "Joan F \(MI\)" <...@removethisameritech.net
Ah, the voice of reason.
| They got money from the first stimulus also. Maybe taking then over
| will get the ball running to get it done right, we won't have them
| forever. I just don't understand what you want someone to do in 6
| months.
| You once said all Obama does is talk doom and gloom, I see you with a
| cup half full. I agree things look bad but gee give every one a
| chance to get things done and done right. It's not just us, it's a
| world thing right now, everyone is trying to come up with some kind
| of plan but it takes time and it takes money
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sun, 24 May 2009 23:56:08 GMT, **Dalin** <...@mindspring.com
On Sun, 24 May 2009 14:12:45 -0400, "Joan F \(MI\)"
<...@removethisameritech.net
As I said, I'd just like him to slow down a little. We don't know
where some of that stimulus money went even.
Dalin
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sat, 23 May 2009 23:55:30 GMT, **Dalin** <...@mindspring.com
On Sat, 23 May 2009 19:35:09 -0400, "Marsha" <...@bellsouth.netwrote:
I want him to slow down!!!
Yes, it takes time. Obama wants to solve all our problems yesterday.
Dalin
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sat, 23 May 2009 20:07:59 -0400, "Marsha" <...@bellsouth.net
See I just don't agree with you on that, that he wants everything yesterday.
I see you wanting things done now. You don't see yourself as that and
probably think I'm crazy. We disagree, that's all, what's right I don't
know, we both can be wrong.
I want to live with whatever time I have left with hope. Hope that my
children and grandchildren live in a better time than we are. I don't have
time for gloom, life is short, stress just upsets.
"**Dalin**" <...@news.east.earthlink.net...
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sun, 24 May 2009 09:30:25 +0100, Bobbie <...@home.net
Oh Well said Marsha. One very good way to avoid stress is to ignore
Dalin. She is so totally negative about almost everything that she could
make it rain on a cloudless day.
Be happy in the belief that you chose the right man and that given time
he will make things better.
Bobbie
--
http://www.smudgespatch.co.uk/newhome2.html
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sun, 24 May 2009 09:50:49 -0400, "Marsha" <...@bellsouth.net
Don't talk about rain, it's been raining here for 10 days now
"Bobbie" <...@mid.individual.net...
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sun, 24 May 2009 14:14:17 -0400, "Joan F \(MI\)" <...@removethisameritech.net
What do you mean slow down? Let the automakers die (along with their
suppliers) and then try to resuscitate them? Tell Congress to stop working
on health care?
|
| I want him to slow down!!!
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sun, 24 May 2009 13:49:46 -0500, Dink <...@invalid.domain
The automakers are dead. Gov. life support only prolongs the
"persistent vegetative state".
Remember all the hue and cry over AIG retention bonuses?
'Car Czar' is building a $50 million 10,000 sq.ft. summer home on
Martha's Vineyard.
--
Dink {Vox clamantis in deserto}
"We ain't rich like y'all, but this year we will be,
'cause we've got Braaaack Obama." ~~ A female moron.
Liberals never lie, they just contradict themselves.
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sun, 24 May 2009 23:59:19 GMT, **Dalin** <...@mindspring.com
I want him to stop throwing money at the auto industry and banks and
then no one even knows where it went. I don't feel there was ever a
plan as to what the recipients were going to use the money for.
Dalin
On Sun, 24 May 2009 14:14:17 -0400, "Joan F \(MI\)"
<...@removethisameritech.net
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sun, 24 May 2009 20:15:17 -0400, "Marsha" <...@bellsouth.net
A lot paid their debts. the banks were told what to do, the car companies
were told to get a plan going so business would be up and running again.
"**Dalin**" <...@news.east.earthlink.net...
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sun, 24 May 2009 21:48:53 -0400, "Joan F \(MI\)" <...@removethisameritech.net
The money for the auto industry went to keep them operating, it's a priority
loan so will be paid back. Not sure how that will work when it is converted
to stock, probably will be preferred stock which generally is not voting
stock. I haven't seen the plan so don't know these details.
| I want him to stop throwing money at the auto industry and banks and
| then no one even knows where it went. I don't feel there was ever a
| plan as to what the recipients were going to use the money for.
|
| Dalin
|
|
|
| On Sun, 24 May 2009 14:14:17 -0400, "Joan F \(MI\)"
| <...@removethisameritech.net|
|| What do you mean slow down? Let the automakers die (along with their
|| suppliers) and then try to resuscitate them? Tell Congress to stop
|| working on health care?
||
|||
||| I want him to slow down!!!
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sun, 24 May 2009 13:51:58 -0400, "Joan F \(MI\)" <...@removethisameritech.net
Oh, nonsense. There are a lot of things he's doing that I'm not happy with
and the Democratic Congress isn't giving him every thing he wants. But that
doesn't mean I like anything Bush and Cheney did, they're the ones who
emptied your 401K in case you didn't notice.
|
| There ain't nobody gonna listen Charlie. The Dems think Obama is God.
| When the factories move overseas, when there are no jobs, when there
| is no religion, when your 401k is empty, when you wait four months for
| elective surgery and have to go to a hospital 100 miles from home,
| they will still think Obama is God.
|
| Dalin
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sun, 24 May 2009 23:50:54 GMT, **Dalin** <...@mindspring.com
that's because you think Joan! But there sure are a lot of people who
don't, who didn't even vote, who just take no interest in what their
government is doing and just blindly follow wherever Obama wants to
go.
And they are going to be very disappointed when he can't deliver on
all his promises.
Dalin
On Sun, 24 May 2009 13:51:58 -0400, "Joan F \(MI\)"
<...@removethisameritech.net
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sun, 24 May 2009 20:13:17 -0400, "Marsha" <...@bellsouth.net
I've never known any President that kept all his promises and maybe some of
these people that didn't vote and don't think don't think of Obama at all.
Their just living. This time around I think you expect more than you ever
expected before. This President didn't make any more promises or have to go
back on some things (still in a short time ) than any other. You get in the
White House and things change, things you never knew about also things you
did know but change before you got there.
"**Dalin**" <...@news.east.earthlink.net...
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Mon, 25 May 2009 11:40:14 GMT, **Dalin** <...@mindspring.com
I think he did make a lot more promises though. Over 500 listed here.
http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/
Dalin
On Sun, 24 May 2009 20:13:17 -0400, "Marsha" <...@bellsouth.netwrote:
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sun, 24 May 2009 21:45:20 -0400, "Joan F \(MI\)" <...@removethisameritech.net
Well, because I think, I am more disappointed every day. He's dragging his
feet on don't ask don't tell, wishy washy on health care, backing down on
Guantanamo, won't even push for a truth commission about whether there were
crimes committed in getting us into war. I understand when you can't
deliver because Congress gets in your way, but I don't understand not
vigorously fighting for what you want. He's a wonderful orator, he should
be moving his base to organize and support him.
| that's because you think Joan! But there sure are a lot of people who
| don't, who didn't even vote, who just take no interest in what their
| government is doing and just blindly follow wherever Obama wants to
| go.
|
| And they are going to be very disappointed when he can't deliver on
| all his promises.
|
| Dalin
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sun, 24 May 2009 20:00:52 -0700 (PDT), kntnkrsolfrt <...@gmail.com
On May 24, 6:45 pm, "Joan F \(MI\)" <...@removethisameritech.netwrote:
You are showing your stupidity, Joan. Almost all that BO promised was
campaign bullshit and he never intended to push hard for it. You are
supposed to feel good that you have this little boy as president and
roll over for another jucking.
Charlie
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sun, 24 May 2009 23:35:23 -0400, "Joan F \(MI\)" <...@removethisameritech.net
Obama didn't promise everything I want. You think I would be happier with
old fart warhorse John McCain? Absolutely not. Democrats always disappoint
me, but Republicans disgust me. I'll choose disappointment.
|
| You are showing your stupidity, Joan. Almost all that BO promised was
| campaign bullshit and he never intended to push hard for it. You are
| supposed to feel good that you have this little boy as president and
| roll over for another jucking.
|
| Charlie
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Sun, 24 May 2009 21:26:04 -0700 (PDT), kntnkrsolfrt <...@gmail.com
On May 24, 8:35 pm, "Joan F \(MI\)" <...@removethisameritech.netwrote:
I wasn't saying that you might have voted republican. I'm that aware
anyhow. What I was trying to indicate is that to expect your
candidate, any candidate to be actually serious about all the things
they promise is unrealistic. And I won't insult you because, I know
you know that.
So very, very much or the vile anti Bush administration tactics by the
democrats were never intended to be followed through with by
prosecuting. It was to defeat them in election. Unfortunately you and
most liberals took all that vile to heart and we must live with
continued vile hate accusations. Probably forever. It is terrible for
our country.
Charlie
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Mon, 25 May 2009 08:56:05 -0400, "Jean B." <...@rcn.com
In spite of the disappointments, one need only look at what
preceded him to remain pretty happy, IMO.
--
Jean B.
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Mon, 25 May 2009 06:24:23 -0700 (PDT), kntnkrsolfrt <...@gmail.com
On May 25, 5:56 am, "Jean B." <...@rcn.com
You have found the way to feel good about BO. Believe all the
falsehoods created about the Bush administration and ignor all the
actual missteps by your BO.
You might also try burying your head in the sand.
Charlie
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Mon, 25 May 2009 13:01:55 GMT, **Dalin** <...@mindspring.com
All good points Joan. But his approval rating is still somewhere
between 62-65% so I think people aren't really paying attention to
these things. Or don't care.
Dalin
On Sun, 24 May 2009 21:45:20 -0400, "Joan F \(MI\)"
<...@removethisameritech.net
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
On Mon, 25 May 2009 10:30:16 -0400, "Marsha" <...@bellsouth.net
Or they don't agree with you and do like him
"**Dalin**" <...@news.east.earthlink.net...
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|